action1_list_reports

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that the tool lists definitions (not report data) and points to the companion data-reading tool, but it does not mention additional behavioral details such as pagination, rate limits, or permission requirements. The read-only nature is implied by 'List' but not explicitly stated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences with no redundant wording. It front-loads the primary purpose and adds a practical pairing note, earning every word's place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no nested objects, output schema present), the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and how to proceed. It does not need to explain return values since an output schema exists. A slight improvement could be mentioning the limit's effect, but that is already in the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description coverage is 100% for the only parameter 'limit', so the schema fully documents its meaning. The tool description adds no extra parameter details, making the baseline of 3 appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'report definitions' with scope 'in the tenant'. It also distinguishes the tool from its sibling action1_get_report_data by noting that it lists definitions, not the data itself, making its role unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear usage context by explicitly pairing with action1_get_report_data to read one, implying that this tool is for discovering available report definitions first. It does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, but the pairing guidance is strong enough to guide correct usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.